Thousands in Los Angeles protest gay-marriage ban - quoted from yahoo.news

AllardChardon

Literotica Guru
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Posts
4,797
Thousands in Los Angeles protest gay-marriage ban
By SHAYA TAYEFE MOHAJER, Associated Press Writer

LOS ANGELES – Outside the gates of a Mormon temple, Kai Cross joined more than 2,000 gay-rights advocates in a chorus of criticism of the church's role in a new statewide ban on same-sex marriage.

Once a devout Mormon who graduated from Brigham Young University, the 41-year-old Cross was disowned by his family and his church after he was outed as a gay man in 2001.

"They are on the losing side of history," Cross said Thursday of the church's opposition to gay marriage. Cross and other protesters blame leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for encouraging Mormons to funnel millions of dollars into television ads and mailings in favor of Proposition 8.

The ballot measure passed Tuesday, which was sponsored by a coalition of religious and social conservative groups, amends the California Constitution to define marriage as a heterosexual act. It overides a state Supreme Court ruling that briefly gave same-sex couples the right to wed.

The protest came amid questions about whether attempts to overturn the prohibition can succeed and whether the 18,000 same-sex marriages performed in California over the past four months are in any danger.

For Cody Krebs, 27, four months was not enough time to fulfill his "intense hope" to marry one day; he and his boyfriend have been together for little more than a year, so they aren't ready to wed.

On Thursday, Krebs dodged eggs hurled at protesters from an apartment building. He said he'd seen worse growing up in Salt Lake City.

"It's important to come out like this because it gets the gay community into the public eye," Krebs said. "I feel like this has started a lot of conversations that had to get started."

The demonstration began outside the temple in the Westwood section of Los Angeles and noisily spilled through the western side of the city, with chants of "Separate church and state" and "What do we want? Equal rights." Some protesters waved signs saying "No on H8" or "I didn't vote against your marriage," and many equated the issue with the civil rights struggle.

Two people were arrested after a confrontation between the crowd and an occupant of a pickup truck that had a banner supporting Proposition 8. One demonstrator ended up with a bloody nose in the fracas. Seven arrests occurred during Los Angeles-area street marches late Wednesday.

The temple protest was organized by the L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center. Its chief executive, Lorri Jean, announced a Web-based effort dubbed InvalidateProp8.org to raise money to fight the constitutional amendment.

Gay-marriage proponents filed three court challenges Wednesday against the ban. The lawsuits raise a rare legal argument: that the ballot measure was actually a dramatic revision of the California Constitution rather than a simple amendment. A constitutional revision must first pass the Legislature before going to the voters.

Andrew Pugno, attorney for the groups that sponsored the amendment, called the lawsuits "frivolous and regrettable."

"It is time that the opponents of traditional marriage respect the voters' decision," he said.

The high court has not said when it will act. State officials said the ban on gay marriage took effect the morning after the election.

"We don't consider it a `Hail Mary' at all," said Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights. "You simply can't so something like this — take away a fundamental right at the ballot."

With many gay newlyweds worried about what the amendment does to their vows, California Attorney General Jerry Brown said he believes those marriages are still valid. But he is also preparing to defend that position in court.

The amendment does not explicitly say whether it applies to those already married. Legal experts said unless there is explicit language, laws are not normally applied retroactively.

"Otherwise a Pandora's Box of chaos is opened," said Stanford University law school professor Jane Schacter. Still, Schacter cautioned that the question of retroactivity "is not a slam dunk."

An employer, for instance, could deny medical benefits to an employee's same-sex spouse. The worker could then sue the employer, giving rise to a case that could determine the validity of the 18,000 marriages.

Supporters of the ban said they will not seek to invalidate the marriages already performed and will leave any legal challenges to others.

A 2003 California law already gives gays registered as domestic partners nearly all the state rights and responsibilities of married couples when it comes to such things as taxes, estate planning and medical decisions. That law is still in effect.

Associated Press writer Paul Elias in San Francisco contributed to this report.


** As a 3rd generation liberal Democratic Californian, I am truly disappointed in the voters of my state.
 
Anthony Pugno is a frivolous and regrettable man-- I want to turn a firehose on him.
 
Strange mix of being proud of living in a country where protest like this is possible... and sad that it's necessary.
 
Andrew Pugno, attorney for the groups that sponsored the amendment, called the lawsuits "frivolous and regrettable."

"It is time that the opponents of traditional marriage respect the voters' decision," he said.
Ok, all gays and lesbians and other opponents to prop 8... if you are against men and women getting married, raise your hand now.

Anyone?

Didn't think so.
 
Sexual preference is a personal affair and the legality to participate in that choice is a right that we should all be able to enjoy, no matter what that preference is. Maybe, the Mormons are still mad because the U.S. Gov outlawed polygamy and then hunted them down for it.
 
If Heather can have 2 mommies there's no reason she cant have 5 mommies.
 
It is possible that many voters is this state find it uncomfortable to be at the forefront of human rights issues. After all, both the gay liberation and the medicinal marijuana movements got their start in San Francisco, I think. California is progressive and maybe the conservatives here, more numbers than I realized, are a bit afraid of the liberals running the show and want to put a stop to it. What better place in their minds than with the gays?
 
Sexual preference is a personal affair and the legality to participate in that choice is a right that we should all be able to enjoy, no matter what that preference is. Maybe, the Mormons are still mad because the U.S. Gov outlawed polygamy and then hunted them down for it.

LOL, one of my first thoughts.

It's certainly ironic that an entity whose "different" beliefs on marriage were legislated is intent on legislating marriage for others.

This is a generational issue, it seems. Young people are overwhelmingly for opening up marriage between two consenting adults. Older people tend to want to narrow the definitions of who may marry. This will happen, unfortunately it will take time and persistence. Easy for me to say... I have the right to marry. We won't stop until every adult has that same right.

For those of you who think this is just a "gay" issue and doesn't affect you, consider this: If we allow religion to define marriage, what will we do when they come after the next group? What about swingers, or people who have open marriages? What about BDSM enthusiasts, or marriages of convenience? If sexual orientation/preference is what makes a marriage wrong, then any sexual practice could be used to narrow the definition further.

If the US wants to make marriage a "sacred, religious" union, then I'm with Liar. Abolish marriage as a state supported idea, and call everyone's union a civil union in the eyes of the law. Equal access and equal rights. Couples who wanted to could then marry in the church of their choice.
 
SWEETNESS

When I become the first Fascist President in 2012 I'll solve your angst by shooting all the perverts on Inauguration Day. A fun way to start things. Blast a perv and I'll sign your pardon.
 
Same sex marriages have been performed without legal consent since the beginning of the movement. Recognizing their validity is another problem entirely. In front of clergy and family, these pioneers of same sex marriage did what their hearts knew was best for them and were forced to do so in relative secret.

Once the moral majority gets ahold of an issue like same sex marriage, the distortion begins. All of it based on several religious dogmas that favor condemnation over forgiveness. And none of them are based on irrefutable truth or anything.

Seems man has always wanted an escape goat species or type of human to pick on, like a bunch of bullies. (Other thread thoughts emerging here.) How many in my lifetime?Countless. First up, when I was little in the early 50s, blacks were it. After Martin Luther King Jr, it was no longer correct to use blacks like that, so Polaks came next, I think. Then blondes. Then dumb red necks. Also mixed in were the Mexicans and all the Orientals. Did I forget anyone? Oh yeah, the French, too, in the last couple of years. Ludicrous.

We, as a race, love to make fun of someone ELSE. Who's left but the gays to pick on as the Number ONE Less-Than-Group of individuals out there? Says the religious right, not me, of course.

Usually the shit trickles down to the family dog, but in this case, there are too many animal lovers to ever tolerate dumb dog and dumb cats jokes for long. LOL

When people treat other people as nicely as their pets, then same sex marriage will be a reality.
 
Ban Haggis, nobody likes that shit, lol.

"Opponents of traditional marriage"? At some we're going to have to sit down and define terms in this country: when does "spin" become outright lying?
 
ALLARD

Gays are the only group who make their sexuality a political issue. I dont believe many people give a fat rats ass who you sleep with, what we're tired of is the I'M QUEER AND I'M HERE hype. When I interact with you I dont want your damned Rainbow Bullshit to be part of it.
 
LOL, one of my first thoughts.

It's certainly ironic that an entity whose "different" beliefs on marriage were legislated is intent on legislating marriage for others.

This is a generational issue, it seems. Young people are overwhelmingly for opening up marriage between two consenting adults. Older people tend to want to narrow the definitions of who may marry. This will happen, unfortunately it will take time and persistence. Easy for me to say... I have the right to marry. We won't stop until every adult has that same right.

For those of you who think this is just a "gay" issue and doesn't affect you, consider this: If we allow religion to define marriage, what will we do when they come after the next group? What about swingers, or people who have open marriages? What about BDSM enthusiasts, or marriages of convenience? If sexual orientation/preference is what makes a marriage wrong, then any sexual practice could be used to narrow the definition further.

If the US wants to make marriage a "sacred, religious" union, then I'm with Liar. Abolish marriage as a state supported idea, and call every one's union a civil union in the eyes of the law. Equal access and equal rights. Couples who wanted to could then marry in the church of their choice.

I agree here. Make all unions civil unions. If you want to be "married" it's a religious thing dictated by your faith. Marriage should have no legal status. Civil Unions would be the standard.

Unfortunately if you're gay and christian odds are you won't ever be "married", as most of the christian faiths (And I do say MOST) are against homosexuality. It's a done deed there. But there are other religions out there that aren't as hard on homosexuality, go forth, experiment, be as liberal as you want to be and open your mind and heart to any of the many religions that are accepting of your sexual preference.

Now an aside, that will get me yelled at here. The violence of the anti 8 protesters is an affront. It is detestable that such an "Open minded" group should be the first to want to MAKE anyone accept them. My god Listen to the arguments that have been put out. It's time for everyone to ACCEPT gay marriage? What happened to peoples' free will here? And the documented cases of vandalism and violence propagated by the anti 8 protesters? For such a peaceful people we certainly have stepped back to the caves haven't we?

Flame on folks.
 
Same sex marriages have been performed without legal consent since the beginning of the movement. Recognizing their validity is another problem entirely. In front of clergy and family, these pioneers of same sex marriage did what their hearts knew was best for them and were forced to do so in relative secret.

Once the moral majority gets ahold of an issue like same sex marriage, the distortion begins. All of it based on several religious dogmas that favor condemnation over forgiveness. And none of them are based on irrefutable truth or anything.

Seems man has always wanted an escape goat species or type of human to pick on, like a bunch of bullies. (Other thread thoughts emerging here.) How many in my lifetime?Countless. First up, when I was little in the early 50s, blacks were it. After Martin Luther King Jr, it was no longer correct to use blacks like that, so Polaks came next, I think. Then blondes. Then dumb red necks. Also mixed in were the Mexicans and all the Orientals. Did I forget anyone? Oh yeah, the French, too, in the last couple of years. Ludicrous.

We, as a race, love to make fun of someone ELSE. Who's left but the gays to pick on as the Number ONE Less-Than-Group of individuals out there? Says the religious right, not me, of course.

Usually the shit trickles down to the family dog, but in this case, there are too many animal lovers to ever tolerate dumb dog and dumb cats jokes for long. LOL

When people treat other people as nicely as their pets, then same sex marriage will be a reality.

Movement? Since when was homosexuality a movement? I thought it was a sexual orientation. Wow, learn something new everyday don't we?
 
I agree here. Make all unions civil unions. If you want to be "married" it's a religious thing dictated by your faith. Marriage should have no legal status. Civil Unions would be the standard.

Unfortunately if you're gay and christian odds are you won't ever be "married", as most of the christian faiths (And I do say MOST) are against homosexuality. It's a done deed there. But there are other religions out there that aren't as hard on homosexuality, go forth, experiment, be as liberal as you want to be and open your mind and heart to any of the many religions that are accepting of your sexual preference.

Now an aside, that will get me yelled at here. The violence of the anti 8 protesters is an affront. It is detestable that such an "Open minded" group should be the first to want to MAKE anyone accept them. My god Listen to the arguments that have been put out. It's time for everyone to ACCEPT gay marriage? What happened to peoples' free will here? And the documented cases of vandalism and violence propagated by the anti 8 protesters? For such a peaceful people we certainly have stepped back to the caves haven't we?

Flame on folks.

"Whatever" to this and all subsequent posts.
 
"Whatever" to this and all subsequent posts.

See? Now this is what I'm talking about. Is there a bit of open mindedness or willingness to discuss a difference of opinion?

Be how you want to be and blessed be to you and your own.
 
Actually Wyld Safe has explained her stance on the Married/Civil Partner debate clear in other threads - I get the impression she's just sick of repeating it.
 
Actually Wyld Safe has explained her stance on the Married/Civil Partner debate clear in other threads - I get the impression she's just sick of repeating it.

I'll take your word for it Just. I can understand that, and I am not looking for a fight.
 
Movement? Since when was homosexuality a movement? I thought it was a sexual orientation. Wow, learn something new everyday don't we?

Homosexuality itself isn't a movement, true. But there is such a thing as the gay rights movement.

I'm pretty surprised anyone would not be familiar with that term, actually.
 
Movement? Since when was homosexuality a movement? I thought it was a sexual orientation. Wow, learn something new everyday don't we?
No, being gay is not a political movement, it is a sexual orientation. There is a political movement started by gay people for the purpose of defending their rights, and I believe this is what Allard is referring to as "the" movement.
 
Back
Top